Wickersley Online Survey

Dear Cllrs Ellis, Hoddinott and Read,

Having read the attached personal Twitter, and discovered that you are running a survey in Wickersley Ward – http://twitter.com/christophe_read – I have tried to access and complete this survey online – http://wickersleyward.org.uk/?page_id=132 – and have been unable to.

When I tried to make a comment on the “other” choice, as none of the alternatives were of interest to me, I find that the page does not accept my free typing and I can get no further to submit my views as an active and empowered citizen.

I shall be grateful therefore if you can arrange to send me a paper hard copy of the survey which I can then complete and return.

Please use the same home address that you have previously used for personal correspondence in connection with the reduction in hours for Wickersley Community Library.

Your early response to the above will be greatly appreciated by me.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

From: Read, Chris <chris.read@rotherham.gov.uk>
Subject: RE: YOUR WICKERSLEY ONLINE SURVEY
To: DON BUXTON
Date: Friday, 14 September, 2012, 11:36

Dear Don,

Thank you for letting us know, and for your interest in the survey. I’m sorry that you have encountered this problem, which we hadn’t picked up previously. We will get a hard copy to your home address, and try to remedy the problem with the online version.

Regards,

Chris

Cllr Chris Read
Labour, Wickersley ward
41 Park Grove, Rotherham, S66 2RZ
tel: 01709 546204 / m: 07585 795980
www.twitter.com/christophe_read <http://www.twitter.com/christophe_read>

Dear Cllr Read,

Thank you for your prompt and courteous response.

As an active and very empowered citizen, voter and ratepayer I look forward to receiving the hard-copy questionnaire and participating in local democracy in my Wickersley ward.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

http://wickersleyward.org.uk/

Cabinet question – Don Buxton follows up?

Dear chiefexecutive@rotherham.gov.uk

You may recall that on Wednesday 4 July 2012 I visited the RMBC Cabinet Meeting and asked the following question in connection with the Proposed Changes to Rotherham’s Library and Information Service:

“What independently accredited Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timebound criteria have RMBC Elected Members and Officers applied to determine that my very successful community library at Wickersley should be disadvantaged by a factor of more than 10% in the proposal to reduce its opening hours?”

The Chairman, Cllr Jahangir Akhtar, thanked me for the question and delegated Cllr Amy Rushforth to respond, which she did. I made notes of her response, among which was a reference to a “Local Needs Assessment”.

I shall be grateful if you, or one of your subordinate employees will provide me with an electronic copy of the document to which Cllr Amy Rushforth was referring, as I wish to acquaint myself with the methods, protocols, manner and weighting under which such “Local Needs Assessment” has been conducted and which has led to the recommendation by your staff that my very successful community library at Wickersley be disadvantaged by a proposed reduction in its opening hours.

I hope that you are able to assist me with this simple request and thus prevent the need for me to revert to use of the Freedom of Information Act to obtain statutory information.

On a final note I wish to thank the very pleasant and welcoming RMBC front counter staff and colleagues who kindly ushered me to the public chamber and ensured for my hospitality and comfort by providing me with a splendid mug of first-class coffee and a useful explanation to the use of the microphone.

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

Don tries to enlist support over Wickersley Library

Dear RMBC Cllrs Andrew, Astbury and Donaldson,

I am informed that our Wickersley Community Library does in fact fall within the Hellaby Electoral Ward for which you are the duly elected RMBC Councillors. I have also previously sent this same e-mail to the Wickersley Ward Councillors Ellis, Read and Hoddinott for their attention and response.

I have received the attached information relating to planned “changes” (aka “cuts”) to our local libraries service and I am astonished to find that our own magnificent library here at Wickersley which is currently open for 45 hours per week is proposed to be cut to 40 hours per week!.

Our library has 66990 visits per year and 3642 active borrowers (among the highest number according to RMBC’s own figures!

I note with a sense of sarcasm and profound disappointment that by comparison the library in the Aston Ward will INCREASE its hours while it boasts a miniscule amount of support from its host community – Aston Library – currently open for 44.5 hours per week -53155 visits per year – 3158 active borrowers – proposed increase hours to 49 per week.

Once again the residents and ratepayers of Wickersley are destined to be disadvantaged and to see their hours transferred to a community who show nowhere near the level of support as that of Wickersley’s residents and ratepayers.

My feeling is that once again my village is on the receiving end “of the Grald effect”.

Please will you inform me of the following at your earliest convenience –

(a) do you intend to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley’s Library hours?

(b) if not, why not?

(c) what specific, measurable, active measures you intend to take to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours?

(d) do you intend to organise any public meetings, and when and where, across Hellaby Ward to inform the public of your plans to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours?

(e) do you plan to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours within –
1. the Rotherham Labour Group, 2. RMBC Cabinet, 3. at full Council Meetings?

(f) if none of the 3 above, please inform me why not.

(g) do you intend to make use of the media to conduct a campaign of opposition to the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours.

I also note with considerable derision that RMBC are spuriously claiming to be responsible for the creation of the new Wickersley Library, whereas in fact it is my firm belief that the Wickersley Community Centre and Library building is owned by Wickersley Parish Council and was a project that was initiatied and actioned and funded entirely by our Parish Council and that RMBC merely rent space from the Parish Council to use for library purposes!

Yours Sincerely,
Donald H. Buxton

See also:

Library Consultation – What it means for Wickersley – Chris Read’s Response – Is that it?

Libraries Consultation? Will this be the usual sham?

Library Consultation – What it means for Wickersley

Library Consultation – What it means for Wickersley – Chris Read’s Response – Is that it?

Don got his reply from Chris Read:

“Dear Don – thanks for your email.

We are aware of the proposal in the consultation and have begun over the past few days to make enquiries to establish the rationale behind this specific proposal for Wickersley.

Once we have been able to get answers to our questions, Emma, Sue and I will sit down together to agree our response to the proposals, and at that stage we will be able to answer your questions properly.

With best wishes,
Chris Read”

Is that it?

Library Consultation – What it means for Wickersley

This interesting Email simply must be shared with readers:

Dear RMBC Cllrs Ellis, Read and Hoddinott,

I have received the attached information relating to planned “changes” (aka “cuts”) to our local libraries service and I am astonished to find that our own magnificent library here at Wickersley which is currently open for 45 hours per week is proposed to be cut to 40 hours per week!.

Our library has 66990 visits per year and 3642 active borrowers (among the highest number according to RMBC’s own figures!

I note with a sense of sarcasm and profound disappointment that by comparison the library in the Aston Ward will INCREASE its hours while it boasts a minuscule amount of support from its host community – Aston Library – currently open for 44.5 hours per week -53155 visits per year – 3158 active borrowers – proposed increase hours to 49 per week.

Once again the residents and ratepayers of Wickersley are destined to be disadvantaged and to see their hours transferred to a community who show nowhere near the level of support as that of Wickersley’s residents and ratepayers.

My feeling is that once again my village is on the receiving end “of the Grald effect”.

Please will you inform me of the following at your earliest convenience –

(a) do you intend to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley’s Library hours?

(b) if not, why not?

(c) what specific, measurable, active measures you intend to take to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours?

(d) do you intend to organise any public meetings, and when and where, across Wickersley Ward to inform the public of your plans to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours?

(e) do you plan to oppose the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours within –
1. the Rotherham Labour Group, 2. RMBC Cabinet, 3. at full Council Meetings?

(f) if none of the 3 above, please inform me why not.

(g) do you intend to make use of the media to conduct a campaign of opposition to the proposed reduction in Wickersley Library’s hours.

I also note with considerable derision that RMBC are spuriously claiming to be responsible for the creation of the new Wickersley Library, whereas in fact it is my firm belief that the Wickersley Community Centre and Library building is owned by Wickersley Parish Council and was a project that was initiated and actioned and funded entirely by our Parish Council and that RMBC merely rent space from the Parish Council to use for library purposes!

Yours Sincerely,

Donald H. Buxton

See also: Libraries Consultation? Will this be the usual sham?

Just another unreliable newspaper

As the House of Commons debates the phone hacking scandal and the conduct of newspapers, July’s issue of MaltbyNews is in circulation. (I hesitate to say “delivered to every house in Maltby as it proclaims, as it’s rather a hit and miss affair).

Amidst the national discussion on the reliability of the press and the infringement of liberties of the public, Maltby News’ editor Kevin Hall has chosen again to disregard his so called policy of giving the”right to reply’. Rather than respond in his ‘newspaper’ to the libellous comments and untruths that he has previously published he has produced an issue with neither “Letters to the Editor”, an  editorial comment nor the name(s) of the journalists’ who have written the copy.

The ‘Events Calendar’ notes the Local Development Framework  Public Consultation dates for Bramley and Wickersley but omits Maltby. Two Maltby Town Council News Pages (at a cost of £300) have a competition entry form with last year’s date on. If it wasn’t for the advertising by local businesses (at whatever the charge) and the ‘wrap around’ by Maltby Academy (ditto the charge) then a more cynical person than myself might conclude that Kevin Hall prints in www.maltbynews.co.uk what is in HIS interest and not that of the Maltby community.